Case Summary (G.R. No. 119673)
Procedural History
INC appealed to the Office of the President, which reversed the X-rating of Series 128. Separately, INC filed a petition in the RTC for certiorari, prohibition, and injunction, challenging the Board’s jurisdiction and abuse of discretion. The RTC granted a preliminary injunction and ultimately ordered the Board to issue permits for all series, later deleting any directive for INC to avoid “attacking” other religions. The Board appealed, and the Court of Appeals reversed, upholding the Board’s jurisdiction and its X-rating of series as “indecent, contrary to law and good customs.”
Statutory Basis for Board’s Authority
Under Section 3(b) of P.D. 1986, the Board may screen and review all television programs. Section 3(c) empowers it to approve, delete objectionable portions from, or prohibit programs that are “immoral, indecent, contrary to law and/or good customs, injurious to the Republic’s prestige, or of dangerous tendency to encourage violence or crime.” The Board’s Implementing Rules add “attack against any race, creed, or religion” as an objectionable standard.
Constitutional Framework on Religious Freedom and Free Speech
The 1987 Constitution guarantees freedom of speech and expression (Art. III, § 4) and freedom of religion and its free exercise (Art. III, § 5). Religious speech enjoys preferred status, protecting both absolute freedom to believe and a regulated freedom to act upon beliefs when external acts affect public welfare. Prior restraints on speech, including religious speech, are presumptively invalid and may only be imposed to prevent a “clear and present danger” of substantive evil.
Analysis on Board Jurisdiction
The Supreme Court affirmed that P.D. 1986 clearly extends the Board’s jurisdiction over all television programs, including religious ones. Submission of religious broadcasts for prior review does not violate the Establishment or Free Exercise clauses. Television’s pervasive reach and ease of access, particularly by children, justify state regulation as an exercise of its police power in line with parens patriae duties.
Analysis on Prior Restraint of Religious Speech
Despite its statutory power, the Board may not impose prior restraints on religious speech except to prevent a clear and present danger. The Board’s X-rating of INC’s series for “attacking” other religions constituted an unconstitutional prior restraint. Criticism of opposing doctrines, however sharp or controversial, is protected speech. The First Amendment analog supports that the remedy for disagreeable religious expression is more speech, not censorship.
Invalidity of the “Attack” Standard
The Board’s rule adding “attack against any religion” has no basis in P.D. 1986, which omits that ground. Article 201, RPC, punishes the exhibition of shows “offending” religion as subsequent punishment, not as a ground for prior censorship. Administrative rules cannot expand or amend statutory prohibitions. Thus, “attack against any religion” is void as a standard for prior restraint.
Application of the Clear and Present Danger Test
The Court reaffirmed t
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 119673)
Facts
- Iglesia ni Cristo (INC) is a duly organized religious organization with a weekly TV program titled “Ang Iglesia ni Cristo,” aired Saturdays on Channel 2 and Sundays on Channel 13.
- The program presents and propagates INC’s religious beliefs, doctrines and practices, often in comparative studies with other religions.
- Between September and November 1992 INC submitted VTR tapes of Series Nos. 115, 119, 121 and 128 to the Board of Review for Motion Pictures and Television (now MTRCB).
- The Board classified those series as “X” (not for public viewing), finding they “offend and constitute an attack against other religions.”
Administrative Appeal to the Office of the President
- On November 28, 1992 INC appealed to the Office of the President the “X” rating of Series No. 128.
- On December 18, 1992 the Executive Secretary reversed the Board’s action, citing free speech and no clear and present danger.
- The Board thereafter permitted public telecast of Series No. 128 under parental guidance.
Civil Case in the RTC
- On December 14, 1992 INC filed Civil Case No. Q-92-14280 in the RTC, Quezon City, alleging the Board acted without jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion in requiring tape submission and in “X” rating Series Nos. 115, 119, 121 and 128.
- The Board, in its answer, invoked its power under P.D. No. 1986 and Article 201, RPC.
Preliminary Injunction Proceedings
- On January 4, 1993 the RTC held a hearing on INC’s motion for preliminary injunction, where documentary evidence was admitted.
- INC posted a P10,000 bond; the RTC issued a writ of preliminary injunction restraining the Board from enforcing the “X” ratings.
Trial Court Judgment and Reconsideration
- On December 15, 1993 the RTC ordered the Board to grant INC the necessary permits but directed INC to “refrain from offending and attacking other existing religions.”
- INC moved for reconsideration to delete the offending clause and to permanently enjoin tape submissions.
- On March 7, 1994 the RTC granted reconsideration, deleting the offending clause and prohibiting future tape-submission requirements.
Court of Appeals Decision
- The Board appealed to the Court of Appeals.
- On March 24, 1995 the CA reversed